Let us save democracy

We have repeatedly been told by the PML-N leadership that, irrespective of how many things may be wrong with the present dispensation, we must suffer them for the sake of continuation of democracy. But on its own part, the PML-N has failed in convincing its coalition partner - PPP - to fulfil its promises under the 'Charter of Democracy' - the basis of the new era of democracy in Pakistan.
As far as PPP is concerned, its leadership tactlessly believes that, irrespective of its conduct, it has the 'right' to stay in power for five years, and should be judged only at the end of its term. Impliedly, you are not to question what the PPP does during its term of office because all the social and economic miracles will happen towards the end of its five-year term. In between, suffer all the pain in the sacred name of democracy, and wait.
PML-N, especially Nawaz Sharif seems to agree with this logic showing scant concern for the fact that five years is a long time, and governance errors in such a period could land Pakistan in a terminal mess, of which signs are now visible. Nawaz Sharif, who has been both a businessman and politician, should be able to visualise the consequences better than the PPP leaders who, by and large, belong to the landed aristocracy.
Given its present conduct PML-N should prepare for tough accountability by the people. The memories of the 'great' decade of democracy (1988-99) wherein the PPP and PML managed the affairs of this country one after the other, did not build a great deal of confidence in democracy. The difference this time is that, while in that 'great' decade of democracy PPP and PML-N were at odds with each other, now they are hand-in-hand.
In this context, of special importance is the NFC award announced on December 10, which was hailed by all parties (especially by the PML-N) as a multi-dimensional success; it certainly is in one sense because it may end the federation-province tensions. But it is more of a boost for the troubled PPP regime, at least for the present. Whether the award will materialise as laid down in its award draft is anybody's guess.
A very big question mark hangs over the federation's strategy to raise the additional resources to be shared with the provinces about which it says precious little. Coming along with admissions about tax evasion (approx Rs 500bn a year), losses of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) funded by the state year-after-year (Rs 252bn last year) and the huge fiscal deficit, the promise to generate and part with more resources appears over-optimistic.
The fact that PML-N has not raised this question makes the award a political manoeuvre rather than a well thought out plan. What our politicians haven't learned is the fact that people can no longer be taken for a ride via false promises, sloganeering, and political manoeuvring. Whether for good (as per public opinion) or for bad (as viewed by in-trouble politicians), the media has created awareness about the defects in these gadgetries.
Without specifying any targets, the finance minister hinted at merging ministries and cutting their expenses, passing the full weight of providing health and education services on to the provinces, and preparing SOEs for privatisation. These measures seem logical but why were they initiated so late although the PPP has been in power for nearly 20 months - not a short interval by any stretch of imagination.
Why, instead of contracting the size of the government, did the PPP government expand it at the outset only to gain the reputation of being the biggest-ever government in Pakistan's history? If the critics call it a blatant effort to benefit the largest numbers of friends (of you know who) for as long as possible before the curtain fell, why call them anti-PPP. Other than benefiting friends, what else does the policy reversal now suggest?
The Ministry of Finance (MoF) finalised the Austerity Plan only on November 14, 2009 and until December 16 the federal cabinet didn't have time to study the measures spelled out therein. As a matter of fact, MoF should have prepared this plan in July 2008 and the cabinet should have implemented it then to manifest how serious the regime was about the optimal utilisation of every penny of tax revenue for the benefit of the 'people' - the acclaimed focus of the PPP.
The worst victim of this lethargy and apathy was the power sector. The Ministry of Water & Power, which promised at the outset that load-shedding will end by December 31, 2009 will now increase load-shedding effective December 21. The loss of precious time while the regime's focus remained fixated on political haggling under a strategy to entrench itself firmly is unpardonable.
This strategy could have achieved its objective if, from day one, the regime realised that it had inherited an economy headed for trouble unless, its fiscal, trade and balance of payment deficits were reduced via austerity, and markets enjoying unfair advantage were stiffly regulated. Above all, there was tough accountability of the bureaucracy.
But all these priorities remained on the backburner while the opposition and the media had a field day in sensationalising the instances of waste of public funds by the federation and the provinces. The clever-by-half PPP spokespersons couldn't undo the damage this scenario was causing to the regime because rising fiscal deficit and mounting public debt that financed the resource waste, revealed the truth they were trying to hide.
It is shocking that politicians, unaware of the governance obligations of the state, fault the judiciary for taking suo moto action. What exactly is this pillar of the state supposed to do when the state visibly falters on its governance obligations? Sit and watch as things get out of hand and public frustrations reach the point where they transform citizens into leaderless uncontrollable mobs that could herald a bloody revolution?
Democracy can't be saved by magic, shabby tricks or lame-duck excuses; it gains acceptability only through conscientious and responsible conduct of the parliament. If the economy keeps drifting and poverty keeps rising, to stop further harm to the country by the casual conduct of its parliament, God forbid, if a change in the system were to occur, no one except the 'democratic politicians' of Pakistan will be to blame.
Tragically, however, while the annulment of the NRO signals urgency for corrective measures, politicians' are focused on confronting the judiciary - the pillar that wants the political set up to stay undisturbed but requires the politicians to mend their ways. How will this confrontation impact Pakistan's image abroad, and prospects of revival of its faltering economy, isn't hard to imagine.
Yet, in spite of its disappointing performance thus far, the people of Pakistan sincerely want to give democracy another chance because, by definition, this dispensation assures government of the people, by the people and for the people. Can Pakistan's politicians prove (by their conduct) the truth of this definition? Let us hope against hope that they can, although time is running out.